Finished Werewolf XXX: Future in Stasis - GAME OVER! Town Wins! Now w/ Postgame analysis!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Camoclone said:
Based off what I remember from last game this seems off. I'll read back. It almost feels coached.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm playing differently than I did last game. I understand that a different playstyle screams scum. I can't see any reason for what I said to be in the interests of another player coaching me, and anyone who did would surely make me post in the same style as last game, don't you think?

And also, Camo, everyone pays attention when votes are placed on them. It's good to remember for later, but Celever's the better vote right now IMO.

Celever said:
This is incredibly flawed logic and one which I can mainly see a scum thinking of. Assessing every role name to figure out whether it would be a good safeclaim or not doesn't make any sense, since the host will intentionally put strong town characters and weaker town characters on both factions. Plus, who would you have not said was a good safe claim? Chatot, Wigglytuff, any other guild members (those that come to head being Sunflora, Chimecho, Corphish, Croagunk, Loudred, Diglett) and even some townspeople like Ursaring and Kecleon would all be totally ideal for a safe claim. As such, I think possibly two of these characters will be safeclaims for the scum, the rest are town. Then the scum will have one or two new made up characters as safeclaims and then one townsmember (assuming a scum size of 5, which seems sensible to me). Speculation about safeclaims is pointless right now, anyway.
Click to expand...
I don't remember you claiming very early last game, but I'll go back to it and reread to make sure. If you did, I stand corrected.

For now: ##UNVOTE: Celever.
 
Completely changed my mind halfway through writing that post and forgot to look over it again. >_>
 
AND I forgot Celever was a host last game. Now to go look through older game threads.
 
Jabberwock said:
Yes, I'm playing differently than I did last game. I understand that a different playstyle screams scum. I can't see any reason for what I said to be in the interests of another player coaching me, and anyone who did would surely make me post in the same style as last game, don't you think?
And also, Camo, everyone pays attention when votes are placed on them. It's good to remember for later, but Celever's the better vote right now IMO.
Click to expand...
Not like what TGK did about one vote. Only scum would do that.


Celever is the best lynch we have at the moment. TGK really wants to be lynched too.
 
I think I'm going to abstain from voting. I'm evidently a terrible judge of playstyle when both our candidates were game mods the only other time I played.
 
Actually, this is a solid case for Day 1.
##UNGNAW: scattered mind
##SINKTEETH: thegrovylekid
The scepticist in me is saying that this is exactly what Camo wants to happen (he'll say I'm throwing my "scumbuddy" under the bus as a final gambit to get me out of this situation) but I actually believe TGK is scum here. Keeping a tally of votes on you and remembering every vote/unvote that's placed on you is pretty OTT and could actually indicate new scum quite well. Couple this with the classic new scum backpedal tactic he used, which Camo also pointed out, and I think that the evidence is actually good, not even necessarily just for Day 1 (though obvious we've no role info to help us).
 
Celever said:
This is incredibly flawed logic and one which I can mainly see a scum thinking of. Assessing every role name to figure out whether it would be a good safeclaim or not doesn't make any sense, since the host will intentionally put strong town characters and weaker town characters on both factions. Plus, who would you have not said was a good safe claim? Chatot, Wigglytuff, any other guild members (those that come to head being Sunflora, Chimecho, Corphish, Croagunk, Loudred, Diglett) and even some townspeople like Ursaring and Kecleon would all be totally ideal for a safe claim. As such, I think possibly two of these characters will be safeclaims for the scum, the rest are town. Then the scum will have one or two new made up characters as safeclaims and then one townsmember (assuming a scum size of 5, which seems sensible to me). Speculation about safeclaims is pointless right now, anyway.
Click to expand...
^ For anyone who is saying that my role name being a good role name means I am scum. This is a closed setup and the flavour has a lot of very innocent characters in it, as I've explained before very clearly in the above quote, so saying that my role name means I'm scum is incredibly flawed at best and downright dumb at worst. ^
Camoclone said:
Now here is where things get good.
Click to expand...
Because you've managed to set two townies up in an argument against each other? That was the first way I interpreted this post, so please could you explain what you meant here.
 
Celever said:
Keeping a tally of votes on you and remembering every vote/unvote that's placed on you is pretty OTT and could actually indicate new scum quite well. Couple this with the classic new scum backpedal tactic he used
Click to expand...
I agree, no one just keeps track of votes and unvotes like that.
But what classic new scum backpedal tactic are you talking about? I think I missed it.
thegrovylekid said:
##UNBIDOOF: Celever
##Leaf Blade: Camoclone
Click to expand...
This is OMGUS, and, added to the above facts, possibly means scum.

##UNVOTE: Celever
##VOTE: thegrovylekid
 
thegrovylekid said:
Good morning, everyone! Anyways, I realised something last night. Back when we were all roleplaying, it wouldn't be hard for Celever to RP Bidoof in such a way that someone [me] would call him out as Bidoof, thus "proving" that he is, in fact, Bidoof and NOT scum, and giving himself an "alibi", so to speak. But this doesn't mean he is Bidoof necessarily.

##Bidoof: Celever
Click to expand...
Here is the backpedal, @Vom. He knew he was on my side yesterday (irl) so he "realised" something last night so that he could vote for me.

And I've never claimed that my role name means I'm not scum, since that'd be a dumb thing to say :p
thegrovylekid said:
What's OTT?


Remember Omega Alpha? I backpedal and contradict myself a lot. I also agree with a lot of people.
Click to expand...
Why'd you try to hide it then? That looks way more suspicious than if you'd have straight up admitted to backpedalling.
 
Celever said:
^ For anyone who is saying that my role name being a good role name means I am scum. This is a closed setup and the flavour has a lot of very innocent characters in it, as I've explained before very clearly in the above quote, so saying that my role name means I'm scum is incredibly flawed at best and downright dumb at worst. ^

Because you've managed to set two townies up in an argument against each other? That was the first way I interpreted this post, so please could you explain what you meant here.
Click to expand...
Yup.
 
Celever said:
Here is the backpedal, @Vom. He knew he was on my side yesterday (irl) so he "realised" something last night so that he could vote for me.

And I've never claimed that my role name means I'm not scum, since that'd be a dumb thing to say
Click to expand...

You've claimed it before...
 
Celever said:
Why'd you try to hide it then? That looks way more suspicious than if you'd have straight up admitted to backpedalling.
Click to expand...
Hide what? I assume anyone who played in Omega alpha or read the thread would know I backpedal a lot.

Camoclone said:
You've claimed it before...
Click to expand...
Camo's got a point here.

Backpedaling again, I know, but it's what I do.
##Un-Leaf Blade: Camoclone
##Leaf Blade: Celever
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top